Claire’s Law/ Sarah’s Law for FIL

I agree with the above. I wouldn't risk it.

you can do it online, fill out as much as you know, if they need more they will contact you

https://www.police.uk/rqo/request/ri/request-information/sarahs-law/triage/v2/ask-police-for-information-child-sexual-offences/

A friend got caught short walking home after closing time and was fined for discreetly peeing in a bush, out of sight of passers by. I don’t know what the charge was but I was there, I can confirm he was definitely just peeing in a bush, not flashing. This was about 10 years ago.

Just do the Sarah’s law. They won’t tell you his offending history if not relevant but they will tell you if he poses a risk to your child. If it was me though I’d trust my gut and just never leave you child with him alone.

It’s could all be innocent but if I were having these thoughts I wouldn’t risk leaving my children with him. The part of your post that stood out to me was the taking them into separate rooms and whispering things in their ear - Again could be nothing, my Grandad used to sneak me away from everyone else and give me bags of sweets before dinner. Nothing sinister and it’s a sweet memory but we have a gut instinct for a reason- it’s not worth the risk.

The intent is to cause alarm and distress.

Not quite true. It’s an offence if you intend to be seen (or could reasonably expect to be seen) and it could reasonably cause alarm/distress to see you. This is what got the naked rambler into so much trouble, despite nudism not being an offence and his insistence he wasn’t out to upset anyone. He intended to be seen and he should have expected that people might not want to see him.

I was relying to the OP who said 'even if it's just flashing'

@Red0 if he is trying to sit GC on his knee and talk quietly to them and take them into other rooms whilst parents are there, what might he do if only your (minimising) MIL is there? Please make safe alternative arrangements for your kids whilst you’re at the funeral. A minute’s harm can cause a lifetime of distress and mistrust.

I don’t know about back then but these days you would be fined for urinating in public. It’s not indecent exposure unless the intent is to be seen and it reasonably causes “alarm and distress” (legal wording). So if a bloke is peeing behind a bin and you happen to walk past and catch a glimpse, that’s not indecent exposure, although it is potentially a public order offence. In the PP where the man deliberately urinated in front of two children, that would absolutely be indecent exposure. So if he actually was arrested for that, it suggests he did something very deliberate and serious.

Don’t second guess yourself. If there is nothing to know I think none of your family would ever find out you tried to research his background and no harm done.
go to the police, even if nothing comes of it, trust your instincts

I think the porn stuff is a red herring as legal porn is just that, some people may be a bit different to what you find a turn on but nonetheless it's completely different.
I wouldn't like the behaviour with the children though so I may well do Sarah's law in your situation

If you have DOB and full name, you could get place of birth (but this might not help) and possibly mother's maiden name (fairly likely as my dad's in his 80s and it's there) but not much else.

I know you say he has a common name and moved a lot but it's worth trying the Internet and also the website find my past has a massive newspaper article. I found a relative being taken to court for csa, the charges were dropped but it's still made me very cautious

If it turned out to be nothing (genuinely needing a wee and just getting caught), would that put your mind at ease? I think it’s the general behaviour that is the concern as well as a possible offence.

My mistake, didn’t clock that it said arrested for and not convicted. Either way though the op should absolutely contact the police and say she is concerned fil may have committed a historic sexual offence and she requires information to safeguard her children. If we only safeguarded children from people who’ve been convicted of sexual offences, or other offences for that matter, that would be a massive failure, given how many people aren’t convicted despite strong evidence. This is the reason why in family court they work on the balance of probability.

I assume you know his DOB so that will help with the information request?
You can probably look him up on Free BMD which will give middle names (I just looked up my dad - it only gives middle initial but even that might help).

You don't get prosecuted for "indecent exposure" (it's not technically called that anyway in law) because of public urination. It's only a crime to expose oneself if there is intent to cause alarm or distress, and only a sexual offence if it's done for sexual gratification. Public urination is disgusting, but not usually done for a sexual thrill.

If he was prosecuted it was for a sexual offence, so you should definitely be wary and contact the police to see what advice they can give.

His porn-habit is a side issue and irrelevant given that you found nothing out of the ordinary.

Are you suggesting the OP lies to the police by saying her FIL has been convicted of a sexual offence? Because he hasn’t that she knows of. Being arrested for something is very different to being charged/convicted.

You have children and you obviously have some concerns.
For your own peace of mind go ahead and request the information.

I think making a request using Sarah's law and discovering nothing is preferably to not making a request and there being something.

Don’t worry about getting more information about his crime, the police will be able to complete their own search with what you already know. You’ll need his full name, date of birth and current address, but it would also be helpful to give them any other previous addresses or areas he lived in if you can. They can run a local and national check.

This.

Whether he was urinating in public because he couldn't wait or was getting sexual gratification from it or the exposure of his penis is really irrelevant (although it is important to know that flashing is often a gateway offence). You may or may not get anywhere with the police but you really need to listen to your instincts and act on them. Even if he's perfectly harmless, it does no harm not to put the children at potential risk.

Yes I would do a Sarah's Law request otherwise you'll just worry, better to find out as much information as you can. The porn use is yuk but hardly unusual, the behaviour with GC doesn't seem inherently dodgy - my FIL would sit them on his lap and would take them off alone to potter in the garden or sit drawing at the table, I never thought it was suspicious for them to be alone with their Grandad.

Obviously, the arrest for indecent exposure is more concerning. I wonder if it could have been when he was much younger and genuinely stopped to pee in a bush while drunk on a night out? That's probably not an unusual occurrence, I've seen very drunk young men peeing in a doorway or alleyway in the city on a night out! Hopefully a Sarah's Law disclosure will give you more detail.